hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

Re: Pinellia pedatisecta Rec. Nov. 4, 2005 as Ty. kumingense T-106

  • Subject: Re: Pinellia pedatisecta Rec. Nov. 4, 2005 as Ty. kumingense T-106
  • From: "Tom Croat" <Thomas.Croat@mobot.org>
  • Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 13:33:31 -0500


            Are you saying that the images you attached are Typhonium pedatisecta?  It does not match the images I have in my files.  I think that these images look like a plant that is a real weed at my place.  I will paste a picture of this to see if I can confirm what it is.  I only know that it does not match the species in your picture. What was the place of origin of the material you sent?



From: aroid-l-bounces@www.gizmoworks.com [mailto:aroid-l-bounces@www.gizmoworks.com] On Behalf Of Marek Argent
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 2:55 PM
To: Alan Galloway; discussion of aroids
Subject: Re: [Aroid-l] Pinellia pedatisecta Rec. Nov. 4,2005 as Ty. kumingense T-106


Dear Alan,


So probably all two (!) other photos found by google on the web as T. kunmingense (except my plant) are also incorrectly identified.

and my plant was identical, the spathe external side was brown,

while in the IAS page photos of T. horsfieldii inflorescences vary from green through yellow to olive, no brown form shown,

but the spadix looks the same as mine.


I see there must be a big mess in the small-tubered aroids sold on auctions and in "rarity" webshops.

First I wanted to write to you about a Pinellia bought on an auction as "Typhonium alpinum".

Today the first inflorescence opened, I took some photos and I noticed this is the same taxon as your photos of Pinellia ternata 'lanceolate leaf form'. I attach photos of my plant taken today.


I don't doubt this is P. ternata, but for many years I've had a green spathed form with broad leaflets. I wonder how two so different forms of the same species could evolute, don't you think it is a subspecies, a variety or even a cultivar?





----- Original Message -----

Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 8:48 PM

Subject: Re: Pinellia pedatisecta Rec. Nov. 4, 2005 as Ty. kumingense T-106




This is Typhonium horsfieldii.







From: Marek Argent

Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 2:24 PM

Subject: Pinellia pedatisecta Rec. Nov. 4, 2005 as Ty. kumingense T-106




This is 100% Pinellia pedatisecta.

I had Typhonium kunmingense, and it looked so:

I don't have better photos, the tubers died next season.



Marek Argent



Nie znaleziono virusa w tej wiadomości przychodzącej.
Sprawdzone przez AVG - www.avg.com
Wersja: 8.5.437 / Baza danych wirusów: 271.1.1/2928 - Data wydania: 06/09/10 18:35:00

Aroid-L mailing list

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index

 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement